John P. Holland Elementary School-Level Redesign Plan
(as amended 9/20/10)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. John P. Holland Elementary School-Level Redesign
A. School-Level Redesign Overview 2
1. School-level redesign team 4
2. Baseline data and needs analysis 6
3. Redesign model 14
4. Stakeholder support 14
B. Essential Conditions for School Effectiveness 17
1. Effective school leadership 17
2. Principal‘s staffing authority 19
3. Professional development and structures for collaboration 19
4. Tiered instruction models and adequate learning time 21
5. Students‘ social, emotional, and health needs 25
6. Family-school relationships 27
7. Strategic use of resources and adequate budget authority 28
8. Aligned curriculum 29
9. Effective instruction 30
10. Student Assessment 30
IV. Implementation Timeline and Benchmarks
V. Measurable Annual Goals
III) SCHOOL-LEVEL REDESIGN
III.A.) John P. Holland Elementary Redesign Overview
III.A.1.a) Overview of Redesign Structure and Process
John P. Holland’s educational theory of change involves the integration of three core strategies that will help drive
the turnaround effort, all of which will be relentlessly informed and refined by data: improved effectiveness of the
school‘s amount and efficacy of instruction, an integrated approach to building early literacy skills and deep
community and family engagement. Together, these elements combine to insure that each student gets the time,
quality instruction and social-emotional supports they need to achieve proficiency. These three core elements are
explained in greater depth throughout this proposal.
Figure 1: Integrated Strategy for Successful School Turnaround
Holland will use data to inform decisions regarding the three target areas for improvement and will implement a
comprehensive set of strategies to increase time-on-task in the classroom, bolster social-emotional supports,
foster strong literacy skills, especially in early grades. Ultimately this will improve academic outcomes for students
over the course of three years. Based on a comprehensive review and analysis of multiple sources of student and
school-level data, the school has identified five, school-wide priorities that encompass two or more elements of the
core components identified for school improvement. Each strategy will consistently use school-wide and student-
level data to monitor progress and drive decision-making:
Five data-driven strategies for redesign:
1. Recruit and support strong, effective teachers
2. Create a culture of high expectation and shared ownership for results
3. Improve instruction through teacher collaboration, school-based professional development and tiered
4. Create strong systems of social and emotional supports
5. Engage the family and community in turnaround goals
Year one, 2010-2011, will consist of immediate, early action in each of the five priorities as well as deep planning for
more comprehensive change in years two and three. During the following two years, the school will systemically
implement the full school reform model, while continuously assessing and refining its implementation.
Overview of the redesign planning process
Holland has benefited from a well-organized, rigorous and inclusive redesign planning process. The school
leadership utilized strategic partners, including the Harvard Three to Third Project, to identify key strategies and
resources for overall turnaround planning efforts at the school. The goal of the redesign process was to design a
sustainable, effective plan addressing high-impact areas to improve student outcomes. The school principal,
Jeichael Henderson, led a team of administrators, instructors, district supports and community representatives. He
ensured that that the planning process was coherent, purposeful and aligned with the school‘s ultimate turnaround
goals. The process began with the meetings of the local stakeholders group (LSG) in the spring, which informed the
Redesign Team‘s analytic strategy. (See Appendix 1 for sample notes from LSG meetings and Appendix 2 for list of
LSG Members.) In all, the Redesign Team met a total of ten times for a minimum of four hours each meeting time.
(See Appendix 3 for a sample agenda.) Each meeting had a specific focus aligned with the major school-level
requirements of the School Improvement Grant application and was facilitated by a content-expert. (See Appendix 4
for a list of Redesign Team meeting focus areas).
Participants made recommendations based on historical MCAS data, school assessments, and anecdotal trend
analysis. Items that garnered consensus support were added to the turnaround plan. Those recommendations were
finalized and then sent to the superintendent‘s office. Going forward it will meet at least monthly to review data and
more often if needed.
Figure 2: Data-driven Redesign Process
Idea Integration, Communication and Decision-making:
In order to ensure that ideas generated at the meetings were incorporated into the school‘s redesign plan, Redesign
Team meeting facilitators distributed meeting notes to the entire planning group via email promptly after the meetings
to the full team, providing an opportunity for additional input and clarifications from participants. Notes were then
incorporated into the draft redesign application, which was shared with the planning group for feedback prior to
submission to the district and state. As a result of this diligent process, the redesign meeting participants have played
a central role in the development of this application and more importantly, the school‘s redesign plan. The groups‘
decision-making process was a consensus, data-driven process most often conducted verbally during meetings.
Future decisions will be made based on early indicators of student performance by members of the leadership team
and with integration of community and teacher input. Planning for the 2010-11 school year and beyond is continuing
in four ways.
1. The Redesign Team will continue to meet to finalize the details of the school‘s redesign plan in order to
begin implementation in the 2010-2011 school year.
2. Summer work groups will meet throughout July and August to continue to define and refine strategies for
implementation on specific core elements of the strategies.
3. Members of faculty and staff will participate in ―Summer Institute,‖ a professional development opportunity
targeted on improving key strategies including content and language objectives, AVID organizational system
for students, Open Circle training, etc., which are outlined in the turnaround plan. It will consist of 30 hours
of professional development over 4 days where teachers will receive training, materials, and other supports
to ensure their readiness to implement strategies outlined in this proposal.
4. The Redesign Team will serve as the school‘s Leadership Team and continue to meet twice a month over
the next three years of its turnaround status, with all meeting dates scheduled into the school calendar. The
Leadership Team will monitor the progress of the school‘s redesign and work with all stakeholders to modify
and adjust the plan as needed. Whether it is adding more time to its schedule, setting more ambitious
learning goals, providing further training for staff, or adjusting scheduling or staffing, the Leadership Team
intends to use the first year of implementation to ensure the second year is even stronger.
III.A.1.b) Profile of the School-Level Redesign Team
III.A.1.b.i - ii) Composition of Redesign Team and Identity of Chair
Jeichael Henderson, school principal, is the chair of the redesign team. His co-team leader was
Assistant Principal Twana Embry. Together, with the input of the instructional leadership teams, school committee
members and committee chairs, school administrations and community members, they led the Redesign Team. This
team included teachers selected from all school-related committees or groups, including:
ILT (Instructional Leadership Team)
MLT (Math Leadership Team)
LAT (Language Acquisition Team)
Further, teachers were selected to represent all the grade levels as well as a diversity of experience and familiarity
with the school environment: members of the committee have been at the Holland between 2 and 20 years. Each
teacher on the team is also a member of one of the school‘s instructional leadership teams with three different
teachers being teacher leaders/chairs of these select committees. This included:
1 first grade sub-separate teacher (special education) (Lauren Staffieri)
1 general education second grade teacher and BTU representative (Pamela Brodie)
1 general education third grade teacher and ILT member (Brianne Brown)
1 general education fourth grade teacher and ILT facilitator (Will Allen)
1 Sheltered English Instruction (SEI) fourth grade teacher and MLT facilitator (Orlando Malave), and
1 ESL (English as a Second Language) teacher, LAT facilitator and ILT member (Maureen Rodriguez)
In addition to members of these committees, each committee chair/leader was also enlisted to work on the Holland
Redesign Plan. Parents were invited to participate in the Local Stakeholders Group (LSG), reflecting the schools
―open door policy‖ for parents of Holland to contribute to the academic successes of their children.
III.A.1.b.iii - iv) Credentials, Experience and qualifications of Core Redesign Team Members (Chair, followed
by alphabetic profiles):
Jeichael Henderson, Chair and Principal: Mr. Henderson has just completed his first full year as Principal of the
John P. Holland Elementary School. Before becoming Principal he served as the Assistant Principal for five years
where he helped bring in initiatives that would help support students‘ social emotional needs. Along with the now
current AP, he helped to re-establish the Holland Parent Council which helps bridge the gap between school and
home life, helping families get resources that are much needed, and supports their efforts as parents in making their
community safer from senseless violence. He has also brought in a mentoring program for young men and also runs
an alternative program to support students on Saturdays during the school year.
William Allen, 4th grade teacher: Mr. Allen holds a Masters of Education from Boston College, where he was a
Donnovan Scholar, and has a B.S. from the University of New Hampshire with a major in business administration. He
is in his 4th year at the Holland. This is his second year facilitating the Instructional Leadership Team at the Holland.
He also helped create the Saturday Learning Academy and served as its administrator for the 11-week program. His
previous career was in private industry. He has extensive experience in designing and implementing safety training
and environmental programs. He was in charge of improving business performance by auditing compliance to
corporate best management practices, working with general managers and divisional vice presidents to find solutions
and maximize resources.
Pamela Brodie, 2nd grade teacher: Ms. Brodie holds a Master‘s of Education from Cambridge College and a
Bachelor‘s from Bethune Cookman College. She has been teaching for 26 years. Throughout her career as a
teacher Ms. Brodie has volunteered to serve on many different committees to help with the betterment of the school
and with the guidance of instruction. Her goal on these committees has been to represent staff and to work on
curriculum to bridge the achievement gap. She has served as BTU representative and a member of Faculty Senate.
She also represented the BTU in the Stakeholders Group. She has worked on developing curriculum and instruction
through Instructional Leadership Team, and Math Leadership Team.
Brianne Brown, 3rd grade teacher: Ms. Brown is a graduate of the Boston Teacher Residency where she spent a
year teaching at the Murphy School. She has been teaching at the Holland School for two years and is a member of
ILT. She has a Masters of Education from the University of Massachusetts and a Bachelors degree from Bryn Mawr
College. She holds dual licensure in Regular and Special Education. Prior to her teaching career she worked in
collaboration with the Office of Educational Equity for the Philadelphia Public Schools to provide guidance, support
and training to high school teachers and principals seeking to make their schools safer for LGBT students.
Twana Embry, Assistant Principal: Mrs. Embry is a first-year assistant principal at the Holland Elementary. This is
her fifteenth year at the Holland; much of her tenure (14 yrs) has been spent as a classroom teacher. She has served
in many capacities while at the Holland such as Literacy Specialist, ESL teacher, New Teacher Developer, Parent
Engagement Coordinator, Character Education Coordinator, Category 4 trainer, classroom teacher and member of
the Instructional Leadership Team. She has helped to develop and sustain several Holland school-wide events,
programs, and initiatives such as creating specialized programming while serving as a fifth grade teacher,
establishing and running the Holland Parent Council, helping to create the Saturday Learning Academy, and
developing the annual Holland Unity Dinner.
Orlando Malave, Math Leadership Team and PD Coordinator: Mr. Malave has been teaching for 18 years. He is
the school representative for the Math Leadership Team and has lead math professional development at the Holland
School. He is certified as a fully bilingual (English/Spanish) teacher in the state of Massachusetts. He has taken the
four categories for Sheltered English Instruction and has passed the MTEL in Reading and Writing. Mr. Malave has
continued to pursue his post graduate degree and is currently enrolled in a CAGS program and will earn a
certification in advanced studies for administration in December 2010.
Maureen Rodriguez, LAT Facilitator and ILT member: Ms. Rodriguez has been teaching for 32 years and has
been with Boston for 25 years. She has served as a LAT Facilitator and an ILT member at the Holland School. Ms.
Rodriguez holds multiple certifications in K-6 and 5-9 as well as reading, ESL, and Bilingual Spanish. She is an ESL
teacher and has been both a Category 3 and 4 trainer at the Holland School. She served at this position with the
understanding that all students benefit from the strategies developed in Category 4 training. Her career-long focus on
language acquisition and instruction underscores her belief that all students are most successful when academic
skills and language are taught across the curriculum.
Lauren Staffieri, Special Needs: Lauren Staffieri has been teaching with Boston Public Schools for ten years, nine
of which she has spent at the Holland. Lauren holds a Master‘s in moderate special needs and has taught in both
substantially separate classrooms as well as a resource room. Lauren has had substantial training in behavioral
management and served on a behavior response team at school. She has taken the four categories for Sheltered
English Instruction. She has also served on the Instructional Leadership Team, a Writing Committee and served as a
Data Analysis Coordinator on the Harvard Three to Third Project for three years.
III.A.2) Baseline Data and Needs Analysis
III.A.2.a) Examine and analyze multiple sources of data
The Holland Redesign Team used qualitative and quantitative data and a practice of inquiry to identify issues and
priorities of improvement. The Team has reviewed data, identified critical issues, probed for causation, and
determined priorities of redesign. The following reflects the team‘s use of data to determine a response.
Figure 3: Data Sources
Area of Inquiry Data Source
Academic Performance • MCAS scores and strand comparisons
• Holland School Diagnostic Report
• Benchmark exams given at beginning and end of year
• Leading and Lagging Indicators, 3rd graders
• Unit Test Scores
• School Data Narrative (provided by District)
• Report card Social Development Scores
School Climate/Family • School events attendance data (turnaround schools announcement, open
and Community houses, etc);
• Homework and reading log completion
• Report card pickup rates
• Parent climate survey content and completion rates
• Home visits and parental engagement trend analysis
• Teacher climate survey
• School choice data
III.A.2.a.i) One-year Disaggregated Data
The following is 2009 MCAS ELA and Mathematics data disaggregated by grade and demographic (ELL, SWD, and
all other statistically significant subgroups.
Proficiency rates were low across all MCAS testing grades and subgroups. Highlights include the following:
100% of LEP students were non-proficient in ELA in 4th and 5th grade in 2009. Students were either
struggling with literacy skills or content knowledge.
100% of SWD in 4th grade were non-proficient in ELA.
5% of African American students scored in the proficient range or better in 4th and 5th grade.
67% of Asian students scored proficient or better in 5th grade.
III.A.2.a.ii) Identified Patterns
The following patterns emerged as data was carefully examined:
LEP student performance lagged behind most other subgroups in ELA.
Asian students performed better than other subgroups in math.
On Math MCAS, student performance across subgroups dipped in 4th grade then rose slightly in 5th grade
for Asian and LEP subgroups.
On ELA MCAS, student performance across subgroups dipped in 4th grade then rose slightly in 5th grade for
SWD, African-American, Asian, and Latino subgroups.
III.A.2.a.iii) Reviewing Additional Data
The teams, data review was extensive and continues. Its review included MEPA data, DIBELS K-2 Assessments,
Boston Public Schools Math Assessments, school attendance data, school climate data and parent survey data.
Additionally, the leadership team has relentlessly collected feedback from staff and community members through 7
interviews and scores of meetings with the LSG, parent council, and ad hoc groups of stakeholders. Classroom
observations and walk-throughs by school and other BPS administrators have provided additional insights into the
challenges at the Holland.
III.A.2.b) Identify Critical Issues
John P. Holland Elementary School serves approximately 680 students in K1 through fifth grade. Ninety-two percent
of students at the school are low-income and 22% require special education services. Almost half (44%) speak a
language other than English as their first language and one-third (33%) are limited English proficient. From 2004 to
2009, there was a 62% increase in the number of LEP students. The most common racial subgroups at the school
are Black (44.5%), Hispanic or Latino (34.5%) and Asian (17.9%).
III.A.2.b.i) Significant groups achieving below standard
Grade 4 SGP for all subgroups except Asians students were below the ―typical‖ range (an SGP for Asian
students could not be calculated). However, Grade 5 students were all at or within 2 SGP points of the
―typical‖ range. The difference between grade 4 SGP and grade 5 SGP for the different subgroups ranged
from 18 points to 27 points, differences which are all educationally meaningful.
III.A.2.b.ii) Issues that emerge from observable patterns in the data
The teacher responses to the climate survey indicate that they have above average confidence in school
leadership and teacher influence over decision-making. However, teachers were less likely to select factors
under their influence as the most important factor influencing how much students learn in school.
The parental response to the school climate survey was only 11%, thus limiting our ability to interpret the
responses. In addition to the School Climate Survey, the school choice data might be an indication of
parents‘ perception of the school. Almost 2% of students within the zone chose Holland; this places Holland
in the 47th percentile of all elementary schools for choice.
Compared to the district, teachers at the Holland were half as likely to identify factors under their influence
as the most important factor influencing how much students learn in school.
III.A.2.b.iii) Multi-year Trends
MCAS strand comparisons for ELA exams from 2006-2009 indicate persistent underperformance in
composition, language, and reading for students enrolled at the Holland.
MCAS strand comparisons for Math exams from 2006-2009 indicate persistent underperformance in all five
math strands for students enrolled at the Holland.
2009-2010 DIBELS data indicates that almost 50% of students meet their grade-specific benchmarks. The
highest percentage of students at benchmark at the end of the year is in K2 (82%).
2008-2009 End of Year (EOY) Math assessments indicated that 69% of Grade 1 students were in Levels 1
and 2 (Warning and Needs Improvement). Grade 2 students performed slightly better, but 66% of Grade 2
students were in Levels 1 and 2.
III.A.2.b.iii) Compare with state and district averages and demographically similar schools.
Across all grades and most subgroups, students were low performing and had low growth on MCAS ELA
and Math. Among BPS elementary schools, Holland was in the 13th percentile for ELA median SGP and in
the 10th percentile for Math median SGP.
The 2008-2009 Student Climate survey results indicate that Holland students have an average view of their
school compared to other Elementary School students.
Student attendance at Holland is worse than most elementary schools in the district; the 91.6% average
daily attendance is in the 18th percentile.
The average daily attendance at Holland was in the bottom 10% of BPS Elementary Schools. In school year
2009-2010, the average attendance rate of students enrolled at the Holland was 91.6%, compared to the
district average of 94.9% for the same grades.
III.A.2.b.v) Areas of growth and/or strength in student achievement patterns.
The performance of Asian students on MCAS Math is a possible source of strength. Asian students across
all grade levels demonstrated typical growth in Math compared to academic peers throughout the state.
Compared to other subgroups at Holland, Asian students had a higher median SGP in Math.
Asian students had a higher median SGP in Math than all other subgroups. Overall, Asians had a median
SGP of 55, which ranged from 15-30 points higher than all other subgroups – a difference which is
The teacher responses to the climate survey indicate that they have above average confidence in school
leadership and teacher influence over decision-making.
III.A.2.b.v) Relationships among or between critical issues and events
A brand new district-wide literacy program in all grades was rolled out one week before the start of the 2009-2010
school year, and this program also includes Tier Two and Tier Three reading interventions. Because full
implementation was not district-mandated until February (though many teachers attended trainings and began as
early as October), anticipated improvements would not be consistently observable until at least the end of 2010-
In addition, because of the language-heavy nature of activities and assessments in the Investigations mathematics
curriculum, the stagnant literacy development of students affects math scores as well.
III.A.2.c) Probe for causation
Based on the data analysis and identification of critical issues itemized above, the Holland Redesign Team spent two
planning meetings identifying patterns in academic performance across grades, subject areas, and subgroups. They
made fact-based observations about the data, hypothesized what factors may have contributed to these outcomes,
and formulated possible redesign strategies to address the issues they uncovered. The team assessed the school
climate and academic outcomes, framed the relationship between families and the school, and identified the trends
they believed were most urgently in need of being addressed.
This process led them to identify three key causations for student underperformance:
Causation 1: Insufficient Partnership between Families and Teachers Limits Student Achievement
Parents and families can support children to reach higher academic achievement levels. At the Holland, the
relationships between families and the school is limited, impacting student performance.
Student attendance at the Holland is worse than most elementary schools in the district; the 91.6% average
daily attendance is in the 18th percentile.
Low parent attendance rates at monthly Parent Council Meetings, Parent-Support workshops, and other
training sessions; fewer than 20 parents and students attended the initial ―Turnaround Information Session‖
in the Fall of 2009.
Limited parental support for school events and policies, including homework completion, scheduling parent-
teacher conferences, and collaborating on disciplinary issues.
Limited support of events and initiatives: Only 11% of Holland parents returned their School Climate Survey
However, targeted interventions have been effective. Specifically:
The Holland has a Sheltered English Instruction program for speakers of Vietnamese and teachers of those
classes are members of the Vietnamese community; trend analysis shows strong and effective partnerships
with the families of their students; Vietnamese students at Holland have strong academic outcomes; across
all grade levels these students demonstrate typical growth in Math compared to their academic peers
throughout the state, versus below average rates for non-Vietnamese Holland students
Causation 2: Limited Early Literacy Skills Impacts Academic Progress across Grade-levels and Subject
The data demonstrates that many students at the Holland enter school with significant challenges that impact their
early Literacy skills. Reading is a building block for higher-level skills of reading and composition. From grades K-2,
children should be learning to read; beyond that, children should be reading to learn. The Holland is not meeting
objectives in both areas.
Analysis of school-wide data show that this trend of underperformance in Literacy starts in the earliest grades.
In Spring 2010 only 47% of students in first grade met the end-of-year DIBELS Literacy Benchmarks.
On a comprehension subtest, only 17% of first graders met or exceeded the benchmark.
Under achievement in early literacy impacts later academic achievement:
90% of Holland students in grades 3-5 did not achieve proficiency on the MCAS ELA exam in 2009. No
students scored above proficient.
Across grade levels, students tested at or below grade level in reading comprehension utilizing the ―Reading
Street‖ curriculum and assessment, however, when they added the vocabulary component scores
consistently dropped significantly
Under achievement in early literacy limits success in other subject areas:
MCAS data from 2007-08 and 2008-09, as well as trend analysis from teachers, indicate that students‘ poor
performance on the Math MCAS may be impacted by their struggles in literacy; students who achieve in
numeracy often struggle with word problems and the language skills required to solve them.
Causation 3: Teachers lack efficient or sufficient instructional strategies
Consistently efficient and effective instruction is not occurring at the Holland, as evidenced by academic outcomes
previously cited. Further, trend analysis shows that teachers‘ concern for providing social-emotional supports to
children at the Holland often compromises their academic rigor and lowers expectations for student performance.
Further, teachers do not see their instruction as the most important factor influencing how much students learn in
In the 2008-2009 teacher climate survey,
o 0% of teachers identified ―academically challenging lessons‖ as the most important factor
influencing how much students learn in school
o Only 17% of teachers reported that knowledge of instructional practice or lessons requiring active
engagement of students was a most important factor.
In social development indicators in 2009 report cards, 54% of students showed ―little to some‖ evidence of
observing classroom rules
There are no structures in place to promote consistent collaboration among teachers.
o Teachers plan, instruct, and assess in isolation.
o Grade level common planning time (CPT) is used for the dissemination of information and logistics
not as a forum for discussing methods of instruction, dilemmas and successes.
o There are few opportunities to observe masterful teaching in situation whether inside the building
or in other Boston public schools.
III.A.2.d) Priorities for redesign
The Redesign team determined what the school could change and influence, as well as determined where it could
intervene. Based on the data analysis, identification of critical issues, key hypothesis and trends indicated above, as
well as the recommendations of the Local Stakeholder Group, the following five priorities will guide the redesign.
Further, the team will consistently use school-wide and student-level data to monitor progress and drive decision-
making around every priorities.
Priority 1: Enable and Support Effective Teaching.
Recruit, select, retain, and develop effective teachers
Strong instructional leadership and highly talented educators are at the core of Holland‘s redesign plan. The data
driving this priority includes: student academic data; teacher climate surveys, and a trend analysis of systems of
reporting/communication. Holland will establish collaborative teaching practices and a strong professional
development plan in integrated/differentiated instruction. In order to advance this priority, Holland will:
Establish required training in best collaborative teaching practices for all teachers.
Provide mathematics PD for grade level teams at which teachers will plan integration of mathematics
vocabulary and differentiation of specific difficult concepts in the Investigations curriculum.
Establish requirement that all teachers be fully trained in all 4 categories by 8/31/2011.
Establish routine of reviewing Category IV methods implemented in the classroom and also integrated into
Reading Street during weekly Common Planning Time (CPT).
Implement training of sub separate paraprofessionals in special needs instruction, so all paraprofessionals
are instructional paraprofessionals.
Require and provide language objectives training for all teachers. (Training provided during summer PD
Establish a grant writing team (GWT) that will pursue grants to perpetuate Turnaround Plan
recommendations and fund additional programs/systems at the Holland. This team will consist of two
teachers who will be specifically trained in grant writing.
Implement new teacher observations/evaluations to provide consistent, constructive feedback to teachers
with follow-up observations and debriefs to discuss where teachers have met or failed to meet yearly
PRIORITY 2: CREATE A CULTURE OF HIGH EXPECTATIONS AND SHARED OWNERSHIP FOR RESULTS
Safe, welcoming environment with high expectations for students
The data driving this priority includes: teacher and parent climate survey and parent/family participation rates.
Inconsistencies in expectations, policies and procedures, both academically and behaviorally, have created a
challenging teaching and learning environment Developing a unified school culture that emphasizes the school‘s
increased rigor and expectations of everyone in the building is critical to the school‘s success. This priority builds
upon existing school initiatives, built on the school‘s motto of ―working hard to get smarter,‖ including ―Character Trait
of the Week‖ (where children are taught about traits such as honesty, teamwork, etc and rewarded for displaying
these traits); the Holland Heroes program (where children are celebrated for being exceptional role models) and
community service opportunities. In order to advance this priority, Holland will:
Further develop Saturday Learning Academy as an optional Saturday program providing small group (10:1
student-teacher ratio) tutoring program for select students who score high needs improvement or better on
either Math or ELA MCAS; Saturday Learning Academy was piloted in the 2009-2010 academic year for
grades 4 and 5 and showed strong qualitative and quantitative results.
Establish ―Summer Rising‖ classes for grades 1-5 for students who have not met their current grade
benchmarks. This transition curriculum, in addition to summer staff, will provide students with the tools they
need to move on to the next grade. Summer Rising is being piloted in the summer of 2010 through a
partnership with the BELL academic and enrichment program, which provides 5 weeks of additional
instruction for nearly 120 children.
Establish ―Holland Prep,‖ a mandatory afterschool program for students who scored low NI or Warning on
MCAS. This program will be divided into two sections: First – ELA focus; Second – Math focus
Create a breakout group meeting for parents of substantially separate students to take place during
established Math Night, ELA Night and Educational Game Night meetings. Meetings will be lead by
substantially separate classroom teachers.
Create a Home/School compact to be agreed to and signed by students‘ parents, school administrators,
and students‘ classroom teachers. Said compact will outline the responsibilities and commitments expected
of student, family and teachers to ensure student‘s academic success.
Establish a school climate committee/program to ensure that the high expectations of students in the
classroom are maintained through the entire Holland campus.
Establish a summer school program for those first graders not yet ready for second grade to receive
additional content instruction.
PRIORITY 3: IMPROVE INSTRUCTION
Teacher collaboration, school-based professional development and tiered interventions and using data to
monitor student progress and make instructional adjustments
The data driving this priority includes: academic data (MCAS scores, dibels data, writing prompt scores and Reading
Street benchmark tests) and professional development data (eg Open Circle assessments). This priority will build
on current initiatives and supports including literacy and math coaches from the district and extended learning
opportunities (e.g. SES afterschool); BELL afterschool & summer). In order to advance this priority, Holland will:
Align the classroom schedule so that the ―Isabella Beck‖ vocabulary enrichment system is utilized three
weeks out of every four. This will provide students with much needed vocabulary development in addition to
that already established in Reading Street and My Sidewalks; this program has been piloted with initial
Provide ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development (see section 3 for more details)
Create a part-time attendance officer position who will be a member of the implementation team. This officer
will be the liaison between the school and the community. The officer will monitor the student attendance on
a daily basis and contact parents when necessary.
Create a full time literacy support specialist position for each grade level. This teacher will serve as a
regular-education intervention for students struggling with grade level reading.
Create a writing leadership team with a representative from each grade level to implement a writing
evaluation and an intervention system. The team will align rubrics and evaluate student work. The
evaluation system will identify those students who are writing at grade level, below grade level, and writing
at level that is two or more grades below the grade in which the student is enrolled.
Create a ―Summer Bridge‖ program for second graders moving on to third grade to ensure they have the
skills they need to succeed in third grade. At this time there is no summer support program for second
PRIORITY 4: CREATE STRONG SYSTEMS OF SOCIAL & EMOTIONAL SUPPORTS
Addressing non-academic challenges that stand in the way of learning
The data driving this priority includes: SST (student support team) and referral data, teacher and parent climate
surveys, and report card data on Social Development measures. This priority will build on limited school resources;
for example Holland has only 1 part-time social worked for nearly 700 students, despite many students struggling to
overcome trauma and/or face high-stress environments outside of school. In order to advance this priority, Holland
Institute Open Circle training for teachers in all grade levels. Teachers will implement Open Circle to
empower students to problem solve social, emotional and interpersonal communication issues that arise
between students. This training is scheduled in August.
In addition to our current social worker, create a full-time position for an additional social worker who would
see students regularly. This social worker would coordinate counseling, lead student groups and meet with
Utilize Boston Partners in Education for volunteers in the classroom to build relationships and to emphasize
the importance of school.
PRIORITY 5: ENGAGE THE FAMILY & COMMUNITY IN REDESIGN GOALS
Engaging families as partners in student learning & school improvement
The data driving this priority includes: attendance rates for school-wide events, completion rates and content of
school climate surveys; reading log completion rates; report card pick-up rates. In order to advance this priority,
Create a Home/School Compact that shows a commitment to children and parents. It also sets
expectations for student success in homework completion, writing, and mathematics and open
communication with school staff. Signatures are required.
Establish communication with parents to discuss their child‘s progress in academic and social/emotional
development. Staff will be required to establish communication with parents within the first week of school
via phone, email, or home visits and document each communication. This communication will be maintained
throughout the year.
Continue implementation of family/community outreach, including: Family Math Night, Family Literacy
Night, Family Game Night, Martin Luther King Oratorical competition, Real Men Read, Mothers/Fathers Day
breakfasts, Celebrating Hispanic Writers Week, First in Math program, and the annual Unity Dinner
Establish a stipend position for a dedicated parent liaison. This person will serve as a contact and resource
for parents, help coordinate Parent Council meetings, and assist in the creation and running of family
Build a business partnership with Boston PIC to bring private industry insight and experience into the
school. These volunteers in the classroom will help reinforce the importance of academics outside of school
and how it impacts the future.
III.A.3: Redesign Model
Based on the baseline data analysis, it is apparent that previous efforts to improve student achievement have not
been successful for the students at the Holland Elementary School. Large improvements in student achievement
and growth are necessary for students to be successful in the classroom and beyond. Drastic change is needed to
make drastic improvement. Therefore, we need to take the necessary steps as a school to help students rapidly
improve their academic performance. As previously described, we believe that there are seven key levers that
research and field knowledge reveal are correlated with accelerated school improvement:
1. Transformational school leaders;
2. Effective classroom teachers;
3. Culture of teamwork, high expectations, and ownership of results;
4. Focus on Instruction;
5. Social and emotional support for students;
6. Family engagement linked to student learning; and
7. Accountability for student achievement.
To select the appropriate federal intervention model, the District evaluated the quality of instruction at the school, the
culture of the adults in the school, and the trajectory of performance at the school. Over the past two years, this
school has already utilized the first two levers in their efforts to redesign the school. In 2009, the Superintendent
appointed Jeichael Henderson as Principal of the Holland. As part of the transformation, the school leadership will
conduct a comprehensive review and reconstitution of the teaching staff. Therefore, a new ―turnaround‖ effort of the
school is unnecessary. Instead, the transformation model was selected for Holland Elementary School to provide the
school leadership with the flexibility and additional resources necessary to continue the current ―turnaround effort‖ to
drive rapid academic improvement. The remaining five key levers will guide the implementation of this redesign plan.
III.A.4: Stakeholder Support
As required by state law, Superintendent Carol Johnson convened a Local Stakeholder Group charged with
developing a series of recommendations to guide the Holland‘s school redesign plan. The following individuals were
selected members of the school‘s Stakeholder Group:
The Local Stakeholder Group met four times for approximately 120 planning minutes each meeting with the goals of
gaining a shared understanding of the background and actions of the District‘s redesign plan as well as agreeing on
next steps in the planning process. The group provided a series of recommendations along five key levers identified
as critical to the school‘s turnaround efforts. The Group‘s recommendations influenced both the direction and content
of the subsequent redesign planning meetings and are outlined below. (See Appendix 5 for more detailed LSG
outcomes and agenda.)
III.A.4.a) For Level 4 Schools only: Level 4 schools must summarize the recommendations of the local stakeholder
group convened by the district superintendent as required by state law shown below:
Recommendation 1: Recruit, select, retain, and develop effective teachers
Require masterful teaching and the highest qualifications. In order to develop and retain effective teachers, the
school must establish the requirement that all teachers be fully trained in all 4 categories by 8/31/2011. As a result of
this training, the school must also establish the routine of reviewing Category IV methods implemented in the
classroom and also integrated into Reading Street during weekly Common Planning Time (CPT). Training must also
be provided and required for all teachers during summer professional development on how to write and implement
language objectives in the classroom.
Establish requirements on other aspects of effective teaching including developing experience and training
around other areas of need. These include the training of those working with children with special needs, math
vocabulary and writing. It must launch required training in best collaborative teaching practices and for all teachers
involved in inclusion classrooms. Teachers will also receive opportunities to observe and discuss best practices
within and without the Holland School. In addition, it must also implement training of substantially separate
paraprofessionals in special needs instruction so all paraprofessionals are instructional paraprofessionals.
Provide mathematics professional development (PD) for grade level teams at which teachers will plan
integration of mathematics vocabulary and differentiation of specific difficult concepts in the Investigations curriculum.
Establish a grant writing team (GWT) that will pursue grants to perpetuate Turnaround Plan
recommendations and fund additional programs/systems at the Holland. This team will consist of two teachers who
will be specifically trained in grant writing.
RECOMMENDATION 2: Create a safe, welcoming environment with high expectations for students
Maintain a culture of high expectations for all students. Create a feeling of shared ownership with the student
and parent community for their success.
Establish a school climate committee/program to ensure that the high expectations of students in the classroom
are maintained through the entire Holland campus. Create a Home/School compact to be agreed to and signed by
students‘ parents, school administration, and students‘ classroom teachers. Said compact will outline the
responsibilities and commitments expected of student, family and teachers to ensure student‘s academic progress.
Implement extended day and extended year programs to meet the needs of students. Focus towards students
taking the MCAS and establish “Holland Prep,” a mandatory after school program for students who scored low NI or
Warning on MCAS. This program will be divided into two sections: First – an English language arts (ELA) focus; and
Second – one with a mathematics focus. The Holland would further develop the existing “Saturday Learning
Academy” as an optional Saturday program providing small group (12:1 student-teacher ratio) tutoring program for
select students who score high needs improvement or better on either MATH or ELA MCAS. Aside from the MCAS,
the Holland School will also establish additional programs to students of all grades that are currently not meeting
benchmarks. The school should establish “Summer Rising” classes for grades 1-5 for students who have not met
their current grade benchmarks. This transition curriculum, in addition to summer staff, will provide students with the
tools they need to move on to the next grade.
Create a breakout group meeting for parents of substantially separate students to take place during
established Math Night, ELA Night and Educational Game Night meetings. This would assist parents in the best ways
to work with their child at home around what is being taught. These meetings will be lead by substantially separate
Recommendation 3: Focus on Instruction
Create interventions based on the data of student progress in the area of literacy. Create a full time literacy
support specialist position for each grade level. This teacher will serve as a regular education intervention for
students struggling with grade level reading.
Create a writing leadership team to evaluate a cross grade writing evaluations and an intervention system
consisting of a team with a representative from each grade level. The team will align rubrics and evaluate student
work. The evaluation system will identify those students who are writing at grade level, below grade level, and writing
at level that is two or more grades below the grade in which the student is enrolled.
Utilize the “Isabella Beck” vocabulary enrichment system and align the classroom schedule to support its
efficacy. This will provide students with much needed vocabulary development in addition to that already established
in Reading Street and My Sidewalks.
RECOMMENDATION 4: Address non-academic challenges that stand in the way of learning
Institute Open Circle training for teachers in all grade levels. Teachers will implement Open Circle to empower
students to problem solve social, emotional and interpersonal communication issues that arise between students.
Hire additional staff to coordinate counseling, lead student groups and meet with students individually.
Create new partnerships, such as volunteers from Boston Partners in Education to build relationships and to
emphasize the importance of school.
RECOMMENDATION 5: Engage families as partners in student learning & school improvement
Create a Home/School Compact that shows a commitment to children and parents. It also sets expectations for
student success in homework completion, writing, and mathematics and open communication with school staff.
Require staff to establish and maintain communication with parents to discuss their child‘s progress in
academic and social/emotional development. Staff will establish communication with parents within the first week of
school via phone, email, or home visits and document each communication. This communication will be maintained
throughout the year.
Engage the community through high-impact events such as: Family Math Night, Family Literacy Night, Family
Game Night, Martin Luther King Oratorical competition, Real Men Read, Mothers/Fathers Day breakfasts,
Celebrating Hispanic Writers Week, and the annual Unity Dinner.
Establish a stipend position for a dedicated parent liaison. This person will serve as a contact and resource for
parents, help coordinate Parent Council meetings, and assist in the creation and running of family engagement
Create a partnership with Boston PIC to bring private industry insight and experience into the school. These
volunteers in the classroom will help reinforce the importance of academics outside of school and how it impacts the
III.A.4.a) Districts seeking expedited approval
The Boston Public Schools initially released a draft school turnaround plan on October 7, 2009 to our school
committee. We then went on to offer a public comment period from October 8, 2009 to November 4, 2009. We
sought and received permission from DESE to participate in an expedited turnaround process in acknowledgement of
this public comment period. That plan was later informed by recommendations from a local stakeholder group in
accordance with state law. On June 30, 2010 that plan was presented to the school committee, local stakeholder
group members, and our bargaining groups. On that same day, the school committee voted to unanimously approve
our district‘s turnaround plan.
III.B) Essential Conditions for School Effectiveness
Leadership and Governance
III.B.1) Effective School Leadership
B. Essential Conditions for School Effectiveness
BPS is in the midst of negotiations for a successor collective bargaining agreement; however, the Boston Teachers
Union (BTU) / BPS and the Boston Association of School Administrators (BASAS) / BPS have agreed, via Joint
Resolution Committees (JRC), to compensation and evaluation resolutions for represented staff at the 12 Level 4
schools. BPS plans to address the performance evaluation process and instrument for teachers and school-based
administrators during successor bargaining.
BPS is committed to negotiating a collective bargaining agreement that protects the interests of the students of
Boston and promotes the highest level of academic achievement. It is our goal to include provisions on the
successor agreement that conform to federal requirements not explicitly addressed in the JRC resolutions. We
expect to complete successor bargaining by May 2011, and BPS will submit to ESE a summary of the new
agreement, including elements that address federal expectations. The Superintendent and School Committee have
identified teacher evaluations as a priority in these negotiations and we expect to develop a new instrument and
process. However, BPS is open to the adoption of ESE‘s default teacher evaluation model if we are unable to
negotiate an agreement that meets federal requirements by May 2011. BPS believes that the Turnaround Plan
submitted to the ESE provides schools with the tools and flexibilities to affect rapid improvement in the academic
success of students. However, we understand that, if ESE concludes that BPS has failed to remove some obstacles
to the changes in practice required under the transformation and turnaround model by May 2011, ESE will terminate
its school turnaround grant on June 30, 2011.
TEACHER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION:
Teacher evaluations at Level 4 schools will be conducted once every two years at both Turnaround and
Transformation designated schools using the current BPS Teacher Performance Evaluation tool with the addition of a
Turnaround Indicator defined in a JRC amendment. This indicator will be added under Dimension 7: Monitoring and
Assessment of Progress. Dimension 7, Performance Indicators, states that a variety of assessments will be used to
evaluate teacher performance in student progress including formative assessments, summative assessments (e.g.
MCAS), and embedded and teacher-developed assessments. The current evaluation tool is included in the
Additionally, the BPS and BTU agreed that teachers and paraprofessionals working at Level 4 schools can receive
Pay-for-Excellence based student performance as measured by the Composite Performance Index (CPI) and median
student growth percentile as established by DESE. Teachers at the high school level can receive additional rewards
based on graduation rates and teachers at the elementary and K8 levels can gain additional awards based on
student attendance rates. Principals / headmasters and are actively involved in the collective bargaining process and
were in involved in shaping the districts proposal to the JRC.
Teachers in Level 4 schools will complete an additional 100 hours of professional development during the school
year, complemented by 30 additional hours of professional development during the summer. All professional
development will be aligned to students learning needs and the school‘s identified problem of practice, with a heavy
emphasis on scaffolding content instruction for English language learners.
Teachers and Paraprofessionals at the Level 4 schools who after targeted feedback fail to improve ―may be
dismissed for good cause.‖ (Massachusetts Statute: An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap). Each year Level 4
schools will choose outstanding teachers to serve in the stipend position of Instructional Leader. Instructional
Leaders will model effective and innovative teaching methods, assist other teachers in reflection and analysis of
student work to improve instruction, and work with administrators to plan and/or conduct professional development.
SCHOOL-BASED ADMINISTRATORS EVALUATION
School-based administrators, members of The Boson Association of School Administrators (BASAS) collective
bargaining unit, in Level 4 schools will be evaluated annually including Interim and Summative evaluations. The
evaluation tool of the district outlines indicators for assessment of student performance under the Instructional
A. Promotes student learning as the fundamental purpose of schooling and, assesses student
improvement using a variety of techniques.
Assists the Principal/Headmaster in ensuring that students meet the City-Wide Learning
Assists the Principal/Headmaster in ensuring that there is an increase in percentage of
students performing at level 3 or 4 on the MCAS.
Assists the Principal/Headmaster in increasing the percentage of students who have
made progress within or among the performance levels.
Under the direction of the Principal/Headmaster encourages utilization of a variety of
student products to measure student growth and development.
A result of the June 24, 2010 Joint Resolution Committee decision, the following language was added regarding
compensation and evaluation of school-based administrators in Level 4 schools.
Pay-For-Excellence –Subject to available funds, beginning in the 2010-2011 school year, each
BASAS member in an Underperforming School may receive an individual stipend award based
upon the entire school‘s aggregate academic performance measured by the Composite
Performance Index and median student growth percentile (and graduation rates for high schools,
or attendance rate for elementary K-8 and middle schools) as established by the DESE. School-
based administrators will be compensated based on meeting the same categories as teachers
Evaluation—A new performance evaluation instrument for BASAS members will be developed by a joint
BPS and BASAS subcommittee. This new tool will incorporate student achievement data for use beginning
on September 1, 2011.
PRINCIPALS and HEADMASTERS EVALUATION
Principals and Headmaster will be evaluated by an Assistant Academic Superintendent and/or the Chief
Accountability Officer responsible for overseeing Level 4 schools. These evaluations will focus on conditions of
teaching and learning including performance and growth of principal in instructional leadership, based on
observations made during multiple school visits. The district‘s evaluation tool includes the leadership category,
―Data Driven Instructional Practice‖ which calls for ensuring that different levels of data analysis inform instruction in
the school, specifically including using MCAS data to measure student performance and growth. Each of these
principal or headmaster will receive compensation based on meeting performance goals established for each school.
III.B.2) Principal’s Staffing Authority
An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap allows every level 4 school to ask all staff to reapply for their positions upon
submission and approval of a turnaround plan. Upon final approval of the district‘s turnaround plan (anticipated date:
July 30, 2010), all staff – teachers, paraprofessionals, secretaries, and assistant principals – will have to reapply for
The BPS and the Boston Public Schools Administrative Guild were able to reach an agreement allowing the John P.
Holland School to begin this process prior to the completion of an approved turnaround plan. The John P. Holland
School fully intends to utilize this same authority to have the remaining staff reapply for their positions once it is made
III.B.3) Professional Development and Structures for Collaboration
As a key redesign priority, the Holland School will improve instruction by implementing a number of teacher
collaboration and school-based professional development initiatives. Teachers will devote a significant amount of
time directly to teacher collaboration and school-based professional development. The school will align these
initiatives with the overall redesign efforts to ensure that they will help the school achieve its ambitious turnaround
With the additional time being given to Turnaround Schools, the Holland will invest significant time for school staff to
collaborate within and across grade levels. Time will also be used for collaboration across grade-level teams with
teachers of Specialty Subjects to align work in subjects like Art, Music and Technology with the general curriculum.
1. Teacher Team Meetings (on-going; weekly). With the additional time being given to Turnaround Schools, The
Holland School teachers will have 90-100 minutes per week embedded in their schedules to meet in grade level
teams. During these meetings, grade-level teams will focus a variety of activities.
Designing formative and summative assessments
Reviewing student work in order to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching methods
Analyzing data in order to determine students‘ needs
Collaboratively planning instruction that incorporates best practices and responds to student needs
Discussing and planning the implementation of instructional strategies learned during professional
Grade-level teams will set goals for their instruction and student achievement based on the identified areas of student
need. Each grade level team will include a lead teacher whose role is to facilitate the meeting and to communicate
the material discussed at the teacher team meetings to school administration. School administrators will support
grade level teams by attending these meetings at the start of the year. Administrative participation will help teachers
assign roles, establish agendas, and facilitate decision-making. This groundwork will ensure that grade-level teams
use their planning time effectively. Also present at some teacher team meetings will be instructional coaches whose
role is to assist with instructional planning and data analysis. Coaches will help teachers determine student needs
based on assessment data and will identify next steps to accelerate student growth.
2. Professional Growth Plans. To build a culture of reflective practice and teacher efficacy, all staff will complete a
Professional Growth Plan at the beginning of the school year. This document will provide the basis for individually-
pursued learning and will be developed by teachers in collaboration with the school administration. Teachers
evaluate their efficacy in the classroom by analyzing student performance data as well as reflecting on their progress
towards gaining mastery of the Seven Dimensions of Effective Teaching, as outlined by the Boston Public Schools.
Using this information, teacher will identify key areas of professional growth to be developed throughout the school
year. Teachers will determine individual professional learning goals for increasing their classroom efficacy in
collaboration with the school administration. The administration and teachers will collaboratively outline the goals,
benchmarks for success, and available resources to help teachers achieve the professional learning goals.
Resources may include individualized coaching, peer mentorship, observation opportunities and external training.
Throughout the year, teachers will receive continuous administrative support as they progress toward meeting their
goals. Teachers and administrators will meet in the middle and end of the school year to discuss progress and
determine whether teachers have met their goals. These meetings will occur during the additional time provided by
the lengthened school day.
3. Opportunities for Teacher Demonstrations and Classroom Observations. To build a strong professional
learning community, the Holland School will structure opportunities for teachers to observe one another. One way in
which they will do this is by performing ―learning walks.‖ During their learning walks, teachers will walk through their
colleagues‘ classrooms and observe students at work in their classrooms. Learning walks will help teachers
determine which instructional practices are working well for the students and identify opportunities to better support
them. Another opportunity for observation will be through the demonstration of strong sample lessons, particularly in
the key focus areas that the school has identified for improving instructional practice. Following these observations,
teachers will discuss the practices they observed and how they might implement them in their own classrooms. The
goal of this initiative is to encourage teachers to use each other as resources by increasing collaboration and creating
a strong support system among teachers. Coverage will be arranged for teachers to participate in these observations
or they will take place during a designated planning period.
4. In-service Professional Development (4 days in the summer, 2 full days during the school year, on-going).
Teachers will participate in multiple professional development opportunities throughout the year. The Holland School
will provide a four-day Summer Institute, 2 full days of professional development during the school year, and multiple
sessions throughout the school year during the scheduled planning time. All staff are expected to complete 90 hours
of professional development each year. The focus for all professional development will be aligned with the priorities
for redesign. It will primarily focus on improvement of school-wide instructional practice, social and emotional
development, and community building. The specific content of the professional development will be determined by
student needs as indicated by data. Topics will include:
Open Circle. This training will provide teachers with tools, effective strategies and a common language to
help students learn to communicate, manage emotions, and problem-solve issues in the classroom.
Training will be provided during the Summer Institute at Wellesley College. Full implementation of the
program will be an expectation for all school staff. (Teacher Efficacy)
Language and Content Objectives. Training will be provided for all Holland staff on how to design lessons
that utilize clear, standards-based content and language objectives, how to effectively communicate
objectives to students, and how to use objectives to assess student progress. (Early Literacy/Teacher
Behavior Management. Staff will gain resources and strategies for managing student behavior and
fostering a community of responsibility and ownership. (Teacher Efficacy)
Teaching With Intentionality. Staff will gain resources and strategies for creating a rigorous classroom and
holding high academic standards for all students. (Teacher Efficacy)
Effective Implementation of Reading Street. Staff will examine best practices for building a strong
foundation of literacy in students through the use of the Reading Street curriculum, including how to
differentiate for diverse learners. (Early Literacy/Teacher Efficacy)
Effective Implementation of Investigations. Staff will examine best practices for teaching math content,
including differentiation for all learners and using data to drive instruction. (Teacher Efficacy)
Parent Partnerships. Staff will examine best practices for building strong, effective relationships with
parents and families that support students socially and academically. (Parent Partnerships)
III.B.4) Student Support
III.B.4.a) Tiered Instruction Models and Adequate Learning Time
The Holland School considers increased learning time essential to its ability to effectively
differentiate and individualize instruction, close achievement gaps, and rapidly accelerate achievement for all
students. The school‘s redesign plan calls for more learning time, adding 30 minutes to the student day, or 90 hours
over the year. A key focus of this time will be to provide tiered interventions tailored to students‘ needs.
In order to meet the academic needs of individual students, with support from the district, the school will implement a
Multi-Tier System of Supports (MTSS). This school-wide model will provide timely and systematic response and have
an individualized focus in order to identify students needing additional supports and differentiate instruction for all
students. Decisions will be based upon universal screening and progress monitoring results and emphasize targeted
delivery of evidence-based programs, services, interventions, and practices.
The MTSS will consist of three tiers of intervention and support of increasing intensity (Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3) across
three domains—academic development, social-emotional-behavioral development, and English language
development. All students will receive Tier 1 support, which consists of high-quality, standards-based, research-
validated, and differentiated instruction in core subject areas. Students who are identified as at-risk in a given domain
will receive Tier 2 support, which entails targeted, research-validated, rapid-response intervention in flexible small
groups. Students who are identified as needing intensive support will receive Tier 3 support, which consists of small
group and/or individualized intervention. Tier 2 and 3 support will be accommodated by increasing instructional time.
This time will be created by adjusting student schedules, lengthening the school day, offering summer enrichment
and skill-building opportunities, employing before- and after-school support programs, and continuing to provide
school vacation acceleration academies.
Students who require Tier 2 literacy instruction will participate in the My Sidewalks intervention program. Students
who require Tier 3 literacy instruction will participate in the Project Read intervention program. In math, the Tier 2 and
Tier 3 instruction will be determined by grade level team professional development. The grade level team will create
3 levels of differentiation for each math topic taught.
All students in the school will be screened once in the Fall to identify their initial tier status in each of the three
domains. Regardless of tier status, all students will receive high-quality, standards-based, differentiated Tier 1
instruction in core subject areas. Students will be assigned to receive additional supports and interventions in a given
domain based upon pre-determined cut scores for performance on the initial universal screening assessment. The
district formative assessment system will also be utilized as a curriculum-based measure of all students‘ academic
performance and progress toward target goals. Students receiving Tier 2 or 3 supports in a given domain will have
their progress monitored every one or two weeks, while students solely receiving Tier 1 support in a given domain will
have their progress monitored every 6 weeks.
At the conclusion of every 8-12 week instructional cycle, Teacher teams will review the tier status for all students in
all domains and adjust support in response to data. These teams will meet and follow a collaborative planning
process when making decisions about students‘ tier status or the supports provided in each domain. For a student
identified as needing Tier 2 or 3 support in a domain, the team will prioritize goals and select a manageable number
of goals for the student. The team will then determine the student‘s current level of performance on the goal, identify
a research-based instructional strategy or intervention for helping the student reach the goal, develop and use a
curriculum-based assessment for weekly progress monitoring, and then evaluate progress at the end of the 8-12
week instructional cycle. If a student does not meet the pre-established progress or performance goals at the
conclusion of an instructional cycle, the teacher team will adjust the student‘s tier status and/or the intervention being
provided to ensure it meets the student‘s needs, and is accelerating the development of the student. Parents of
students currently receiving Tier 2 or 3 support or parents of students identified as needing Tier 2 or 3 support, will
meet with the teacher team at the conclusion of the instructional cycle to review the student‘s progress and
performance and the supports being provided.
To address behavior concerns and support the social-emotional-behavioral development of all students, the school
will adopt a school-wide system of behavioral supports. The three-tiered positive behavior support system will be
implemented in classroom and in non-classroom settings, providing students with a variety of strategies to help them
achieve social and learning goals, incentivize positive behaviors, and prevent problem behaviors.
All progress monitoring results will be documented in the MTSS electronic student dashboard. The dashboard will
include data for every student, including tier status for the three domains, universal screening results, progress
monitoring assessment results, individualized goals for each domain, and assigned supports and interventions
provided during every instructional cycle. The fields for data pertaining to the current instructional cycle will lock
shortly after the conclusion of each instructional cycle in order to preserve the integrity and accuracy of data.
Importantly, users will still be able to view data from past instructional cycles.
The Holland has adapted its structures in order to help the MTSS work efficiently and effectively. Grade level teams
will contribute to the tiered instruction model. In their meetings, they will cluster students who have shared skill gaps
so that teachers can provide targeted intervention for these students. The Holland School revised its Student Support
referral form in 2009-2010 to assist teachers in using multiple resources to aide students with diverse needs. The
Holland School will continue to train teachers to use this form to more accurately identify the resources needed to
help all students reach proficiency. In addition, The Holland School will use additional funding to pay 6 reading
specialists. These reading specialists examine student testing data in order to identify students who require Tier 2
III.B.4.b) Specific steps to address achievement gaps for limited English-proficient, special education, and
The Holland‘s goal is to provide targeted instruction for students of low-income, special needs, and limited English
proficiency in order to address the achievement gap for these populations. To adequately meet the needs of its
limited English-proficient students, the Holland School will require that all newly hired staff to the building be either
ESL certified or have completed the four components of category training for sheltered English instruction. For those
teachers who do not meet these qualifications, they must agree to sign off on a commitment to be trained in all four
categories by the end of their first year teaching and work towards receiving their ESL license within the first three
years of employment. Additionally, the Holland School is requiring that all SEI strand teachers become ESL certified
if they are currently not certified.
As it has done before, the Holland School will cluster ELL students who are in general education with a classroom
teacher that has all 4 categories and will ask them to become ESL certified within two years. The school day will
feature staggered literacy blocks. With this schedule, ESL push-in support can be sustained at all grade levels. This
structure will ensure that The Holland School meets the needs of English Language Learners.
Given that 33% percent of all students enrolled at the Holland School are English Language Learners, the Boston
Public Schools is moving to ensure that essential components of programming for ELLs are in place. A vital
component of such as effort is teacher training.
Expert members of the BPS Office of English Language Learners will provide workshops and training to mainstream
teachers on sheltering content as well as provide training for ESL teachers to improve their skills, with a focus on
core teaching elements and best practices. Mainstream teachers are taking their personal time to participate in
state-mandated ―Category‖ trainings en masse, learning necessary techniques in Sheltered English Immersion (SEI)
provision. Boston has also been one of the first districts in the state approved to provide a Hybrid Category I in
conjunction with Lesley University faculty, combining both online and face-to-face instruction. Every effort has been
made in the development of this training to ensure fidelity of implementation to state standards.
The District also continues to explore any and all options for delivering ESL with licensed teachers, maximizing
utilization of trained teachers it already employs. Boston developed the Pathways and the Boston Teacher Residency
program as well as the DESE-sponsored MELT program to provide skills in teaching ESL necessary to take and pass
the licensing exam. Recent graduates of the MELT program had a 92% pass rate on the ESL MTEL test.
The Holland School has been staffed with both promising new and experienced veteran teachers who are open to
new ideas and community involvement. We have prioritized being accessible, responsive, and culturally sensitive to
both students and parents in order to set a welcoming tone and foster strong communication. One of our goals is to
make the school a center not only for academics but for the community. Outreach to parents, whether through adult
ESL classes, parental participation in classroom activities or by use of parent liaisons will improve students‘
Individual school efforts are crucial, but The Holland School‘s success is only possible with District-wide support.
Toward this end, BPS has reinvigorated its Office of English Language Learners. Dr. Eileen de los Reyes is the first
OELL director who is an assistant superintendent, giving English language learners a strong voice at the policy-
making level. The OELL reaches out to other District departments with overlapping missions, such as the Special
Education department, to ensure coordination and collaboration. OELL also will provide technical assistance in
incorporating best practices, monitoring, and clarification of state and federal regulations for administrators, faculty,
Turnaround school staff members‘ investment in recent innovations, such as Tiered Instruction, will complement and
be aligned with future changes in the instruction and support of ELLs. The District is committed to continuously
reevaluating progress and refining practices based on data in its effort to narrow the significant ELL achievement
gap. The OELL has its own internal monitoring protocol, which it will continue to improve in order to increase positive
student outcomes and ensure compliance with state and federal mandates.
An equally vital component of our supports for English Language Learners is to redesign our ELL programming,
taking full advantage of the flexibilities and authorities made available to level 4 schools. The Act Relative to the
Achievement Gap outlines that redesign plans may include alternative English language education programs that can
disregard the requirement that limited English proficient (LEP) students be educated through Sheltered English
Immersion (SEI). In other words, the Holland School may create a program such as Transitional Bilingual Education,
which are not currently permitted under Ch. 71A without a waiver.
The Holland School will pursue this option. Planning of such a program will take place during Year 1 of our
turnaround efforts. The planning steps we have adopted will be based on guidance provided by the Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education1, and build on work already under way by our Office of English Language
Learners in every school in the district. Those steps are as follows:
Review of student enrollment. Identify the number of limited English proficient (LEP) students, and the total
enrollment in the school. (Total enrollment/LEP percentage ratios would indicate most likely program models. For
example, schools with a very high percentage of ELLs of one particular language group would be likely candidates
for a Transitional Bilingual Education model.)
Identification of language groups. Identify the language groups represented and approximate percentages of each
in the Level 4 school. (This would indicate whether TBE and/or models specifically designed for low-incidence
populations would be applicable at this school. Schools with a high percentage of one language group would more
likely be candidates for a TBE model.)
Analysis of MEPA Proficiency Levels and growth data for all ELLs. Identify the proficiency levels and growth
data for each grade of ELL students. (What are the patterns and trends? Have certain groups of ELLs been stagnant
at one proficiency level for several years? Why?)
Identification of ESL teachers. Identify the ESL teachers employed in the Level 4 school. Gather licensure
information for each teacher (e.g., licensed, unlicensed, waivered).
Review of general education teachers’ credentials and training. Gather licensure information and identify
Category trainings each general education teacher has completed. This review will be coupled with consideration of
how teachers will be supported in completing Category training.
ESL curriculum audit: Is the ESL curriculum is based on the ELPBO? Do ESL teachers create yearly, monthly,
and/or weekly curriculum maps based on the ELPBO?
Identification of current ESL models being used in your school: Describe which program(s) are in use:
Sheltered English Immersion, Transitional Bilingual Education, Two-Way/Dual Immersion, or another program
Alternative or revised program proposal. Provision of a school-level program proposal that describes:
-The rationale for the specific population of students served, accompanied by data specific to your district, and recent
research that supports this model.
-Staff being assigned to the alternative ELE program and why.
-How the district has involved stakeholders in the development of the alternative ELE program.
-Components within the new program that will contribute to closing existing achievement gaps for English Language
Identification of measurable annual goals. Identify the goals established for assessing progress of LEP students,
and the reduction of achievement gaps among different groups of students, as required by the Act.
Steps taken and quoted from Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’ s Offices of
Language Acquisition and Academic Achievement Alternative ELE Programs for Level 4 Schools guidance
Professional Development and Planning. Describe how professional development and planning time for teachers
and administrators at the school will include specific strategies and content designed to ―maximize the rapid
academic achievement of limited English proficient students‖, as required by the Act.
Parent Advisory Council. If the school operates a limited English proficient program or programs for limited English
proficient students in any one language group, it must establish a limited English proficient parent advisory council.
(See Appendix 6 for more information on PAC).
Upon completion of this process in year 1, the school will embark on full implementation of a new program in years 2
and 3, with on-going support and monitoring by the Office of English Language Learners.
III.B.4.c) Schedules and Strategies that Provide Increased Learning Time
The Holland will implement staggered reading blocks and a school-wide master schedule to align content blocks so
that support staff can consistently and effectively provide differentiated instruction and intervention support.
In school year 2010-2011 the Holland, along with other Turnaround Schools in BPS, will gain an additional 30
minutes of learning time per day. Based on an analysis of the most recent data, the Holland School will use the
increased learning time provided to help bridge gaps in literacy for struggling learners. This may happen in multiple
ways, depending on the needs of the learners in a particular grade or classroom, including small group,
individualized, and/or whole group instruction. The additional 30 minutes will create space in the daily schedule for a
30 minute Tier 2 intervention block. During this time, teachers can provide students with targeted instruction that will
address their math and literacy skill deficits.
III.B.5.a) Students’ Social, Emotional, and Health Needs
In order to ensure the academic success of its students, the Holland School must address the social, emotional, and
health needs of its students. It will do so by adopting the City Connects model of student support. The key
component of this model is a full-time School Site Coordinator whose job is to connect students to the prevention,
intervention, and enrichment services that students need to thrive (Please see Appendix 7 for evaluation of the City
Connects program). The Holland School will also receive support from the DELTAS program (Please see Appendix 8
for explanation of DELTAS).
The following components will comprise specific tools and strategies the Holland School will use to identify and meet
students‘ social, emotional, and health needs:
Component Brief Description Tool/Strategy
Student Systems that accurately and proactively Onsite coaching from a former
Support identify students‘ needs and connect them to principal
Infrastructure appropriate, effective resources Student support teams – school staff
and partners who meet weekly to
discuss student needs – class by
class, student by student
Student Support Toolkit (Virtual
Extended Supports that remove social, emotional, and Onsite technical assistance
Services physical barriers to learning and healthy Partnerships with community health
development organizations brokered by the Boston
Public Health Commission
Partnerships with Harvard School of
Public Health which will provide
schools with health and nutrition
TRIspace2 – an online repository of
potential partners and resources
Partnerships Mutually-beneficial relationships with Onsite technical assistance
individuals and groups that work with the TRIspace
school to do work the school could not do as Partnership commitment inventory
well on its own and assessment (Virtual Coach)
Extended Programs that address the need of every Onsite technical assistance
Learning Time child for productive and engaging activities Partnerships with community-based
before school, afterschool, and in the organizations brokered by DELTAS
Program quality assessments (Virtual
Healthy A healthy climate exists when the adult-to- Onsite coaching and training
Climate adult, adult-to-child, and child-to-child Restorative Justice3 training
relationships are conducive the school
achieving its goals
The following steps will be followed to design and implement a coherent and relevant set of student supports:
Pre-Assessment – DELTAS has already inventoried the student support capacity of the Holland School and an
internal report on its student support capacity has been completed.
Strategy Development – Based on the pre-assessment, DELTAS is working with school leadership to put in
place a robust student support system with each of the aforementioned components, building on existing school
capacity and partnerships. Priority areas have been set and DELTAS is working to develop work plans.
Student Support Coordinator – A full-time coordinator will be hired and placed at each school. The skills
sought after in the coordinator will be contingent on the needs of the school. While the coordinator is a DELTAS
employee, the principal/headmaster will have the final say as to who works at the school. Coordinators will be
hired in September. In the meantime, DELTAS will hire consultants to work on the work plan development at the
schools through the month of August.
Student Support Team – The Student Support Team is comprised of school administrators, teachers, staff,
community partners and parents. Its purpose is to coordinate the non-academic services and resources among
service providers. One of the first jobs of the Coordinator will be to establish and convene this team.
DELTAS Program Director – DELTAS will assign a Program Director to each Turnaround School to serve as a
liaison to DELTAS resources and as a co-supervisor (with the principal/headmaster) of the Student Support
Coordinator. The Program Director will also serve as a coach to the site helping it achieve its benchmarks. The
An approach to behavior guidance and school climate that involves engaging, to the extent possible, those
who have a stake in a specific offense to collectively identify harms, needs, and obligations in order to heal
and put things as right as possible.
Program Director has met several times with Jeichael Henderson to gather information regarding the strategic
direction of the schools. These meetings will be ongoing throughout the 3 years.
Articulation of Benchmarks – The DELTAS Coordinator will work with the school and DELTAS central to
articulate specific benchmarks or indicators of progress. The Coordinator will be evaluated based on the
school‘s achievement of its benchmarks. The Benchmarks will be articulated by October 2010.
A management information system will be used to identify students in need of services, as well as evaluate and
assess the effectiveness of this approach. This internet-based system, called dMIStify, enables the user to:
Initiate and track referrals to extended services
Automatically identify students most academically and socially ―at risk‖
Track program and activity participation data
Cross-reference program date with academic data
III.B.6.a) Family-School Relationships
III.B.6.a) Ongoing mechanisms for parent, family, and community engagement.
As an integral part of the redesign process, the Holland School will maintain and expand its ties to the families that
comprise the school community. Several ongoing mechanisms exist and will be further developed in order to engage
students and their families in the Holland School learning community.
Parent Council Board. This group, led by 2 chairs and a liaison, is open to all parents. At open house in
September, the board conducts a needs assessment in which parents complete a survey. The school
administration and parent council board collaborate in an effort to meet the needs identified by the survey by
holding monthly meetings and workshops. Examples of needs addressed include the management of time,
stress, and money.
Q & A with the Principal. These meetings are held 3 times a year. They give parents an opportunity to ask
questions about Boston Public Schools, buses, etc.
Parent Zone. This section of the school building is dedicated to parents. They can find information about
school events, community events, GED resources, and communicate with each other about their families‘
20/20/20 Campaign. This program was launched in the 2009-2010 school year. It encourages students to
trade an hour of screen time (TV, video games, the internet) a night for 20 minutes each of reading,
interactive play, and interactive conversation. The program is coordinated by Rebecca Bachier, a parent
liaison who was trained by ReadBoston.
Holland Family Unity Dinner. This school-wide event is held every winter.
Family Game Night. This school-wide event is held in the spring. On this night, teachers and parents
gather to introduce parents to interactive play activities that build academic skills. Each family receives a
new game and piece of literature to take home.
Annual Family Project. Families work on projects with their students. The projects are displayed at the
Home Visits. The Holland School implements a limited home visit program in collaboration with the Harvard
3 to 3rd program. Through the program, the pre-kindergarten and kindergarten teachers visit students‘ home
in August to provide information about the school and other resources to the families. The Harvard 3 to 3rd
program trains teachers on how to conduct effective home visits and engage parents in their students‘
education. Harvard also pays the teachers a stipend for doing the home visits. With additional funds, the
school would like to expand the program to all grade levels and allocate 15-20 hours for teachers to do
Extended Summer Learning. BELL (Building Educated Leaders for Life) administers a summer program
that is exclusively for students from the Holland School. In order to increase parent engagement, one of the
program‘s primary goals, BELL organizes a mandatory parent night and requires that parents complete
reading logs for their students. This program currently serves 120 students. The Holland School would like
to expand the program to reach more students.
III.B.6.b) Steps to improve or expand child welfare services and, as appropriate, law enforcement services in
the school community, in order to promote a safe and secure learning environment
The Holland School fosters a number of connections to the community in order to ensure that its students benefit
from a safe and healthy learning environment.
Children’s Hospital. With funding from EdVestors, a trained social worker visits the Holland School 2 days
a week to collaborate with the BPS social worker. She helps classrooms build healthy communities. She
also supports children who struggle with behavior management and their families. The Holland School
would like to expand her role.
Connecting with Care. This program provides a full-time, school-based children‘s trauma mental health
clinician to address the problem of neighborhood violence. This clinician carries a caseload of 25 children
and families. The school also works with the clinician‘s agency to locate additional or alternative services for
III.B.6.c) Workforce Development Services
The Holland School also seeks to cultivate stronger families by providing parents with important skills for
employment. For example, the school participates in Technology Goes Home, offering 75 hours of basic computer
training to fourth and fifth grade students and their parents. At the end of the training, participants create a family
project. The program also offers computers for families to take home at a deeply discounted price. The program was
able to serve 17 families in the 2009-2010 year, and even more families expressed interest. With additional funds,
the Holland School could expand this program.
Financial and Asset Management
III.B.7 Strategic Use of Resources and Adequate Budget Authority
Each level 4 school will have the flexibility and authority to deploy their human, fiscal, and technical
resources in a way that complies with federal and state laws and aligns with the priorities of the redesign
plan. The John P. Holland School has already been given a base budget allocation from state and
municipal funds. School improvement grant dollars will complement that base allocation and be at the sole
discretion of the principal. The district has prioritized the John P. Holland School for additional funding from
private and federal grants, along with the district‘s other Level 4 schools. Already, over $6.5 million in Title I
– ARRA funding has been dedicated to support a longer school day, daily student transportation,
turnaround support teams, acceleration academies, before and after-school programming, social and
emotional supports, student efficacy development, and leadership coaching. An additional $1,000,000 in
private dollars has already been raised to support master teachers and arts programming. Throughout the
3-year period of this redesign plan the district will continue to prioritize the John P. Holland School for
federal (i.e, Title I A, Teacher Incentive Fund, Race to the Top, etc.), state and private funding
At the conclusion of the 3-year period of this turnaround plan the district will make every effort to sustain –
institutionalize – the investments made to turn John P. Holland School around. Currently the BPS is undertaking a
large scale initiative to redesign its services and supports for students and families. This redesign will include a
radical change in transportation provision, student assignment, and budgeting, all in service of increasing supports
for every student to be college ready and success bound. This effort will include closing schools and investing more
heavily in others. This challenging, thought necessary process, will create the opportunity to reinvest in schools and
programs throughout the city, specifically John P. Holland School.
A complement to this large scale effort is an initiative launched in fall 2010 by Boston‘s Mayor Thomas M.
Menino and the BPS called the Circle of Promise. The Circle of Promise is a strategy to provide greater
opportunities for young people and their parents by implementing place-based supports, boosting student
achievement and eliminating the cycle of poverty. Included in a 5 square mile area that encompasses
some of Boston‘s most impoverished neighborhoods in Roxbury and Dorchester are 10 of the 12 of
Boston‗s level 4 schools. The City‘s initial inventory found over 140 community, government and nonprofit
organizations within that area that operate mostly independently of one another, making it a challenge for
families to navigate the system. The Circle of Promise will connect the comprehensive resources that are
already in place to provide a ―conveyor belt‖ for neighborhoods to seamlessly deliver services to the
community. The plan calls for city programs and community organizations to share data and become one
integrated network that will educate and guide students and families throughout their development and
education – from birth to college, dawn to dusk.
Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment
III.B.8 Aligned Curriculum
School staff will collaborate with the Office of Curriculum and Instruction, the Office of Special Education and the
Office of English Language Learner to support the alignment of John P. Holland School‘s instructional programs with
district and state standards. This collaboration will be primarily in the form of working with district-level turnaround
support teams. These teams will consist of specialists in literacy and mathematics, English language development,
and special education and student support. Each team will be assigned to five (5) turnaround schools providing job-
embedded professional development to classroom teachers in support of their students‘ math, reading, and language
development. Team members will provide in-depth, ongoing and systematic support to classroom teachers by
facilitating teacher professional development and problem solving. The goal of the teams is to:
Disseminate foundational knowledge of literacy and math pedagogy to teachers and
Build capacity within schools to guide and monitor the implementation of each school‘s turnaround plan;
Examine data as it becomes available;
Sustain high quality professional development focused on each student subgroup‘s needs (particularly
English language learners and students with disabilities); and
Foster vertical and horizontal alignment between grades and across classrooms..
Turnaround support teams will engage with each school‘s administration to examine existing data, clarify school
goals, and the plan for ensuring the success of various student subgroups. These initial meetings will determine
timelines and benchmarks for each school‘s staff support and intervention – including professional development and
data analysis meetings. Additionally, turnaround support teams will train and/or support reading and math specialists
at each school to address the literacy and math needs of their most vulnerable students. The centerpiece of the
professional development will be the district‘s core curriculum. Team members will observe in each classroom and
meet with each teacher to provide initial feedback on the alignment of instructional programs with the district‘s core
curriculum and state standards – as well as provide feedback to school administrators on the degree of
implementation of multiple tiers of support (particularly for English language learners, students with disabilities, and
students whose literacy and/or math skills are more than two years below grade level).
BPS has invested in the development of district-wide formative assessment systems in literacy, mathematics and
other content areas. Results of these regularly administered assessments will be collected, organized, and analyzed
to inform student level supports and future professional development.
Over the course of school year 2010-11, turnaround support teams will engage with each individual teacher through
observations and meetings at least four times. In addition, the teams will meet with the school administration at least
quarterly. The meetings with teachers are designed to provide specific feedback on instruction and curriculum
implementation. The meetings with school administrators are designed to provide feedback on the alignment of
instructional programs with district and state standards and to identify strengths and opportunities for improvement
efforts to implement multiple levels of support to students.
III.B.9 Effective Instruction
The Holland School‘s instructional approach will be based on the following key ideas:
Instructional Coherence and Improvement. High quality standards-based instruction at the Holland
School will reflect objectives from both the SIOP model and Massachusetts standards. In an effective
classroom, both content and language objectives will be explicit and visible in student-friendly language.
Lessons will be scaffolded to provide for the gradual release of responsibility to the students. Teachers will
craft follow-up lessons based on student performance on assessment of student comprehension of the
Relevant Assessments. Teachers will use assessment data to form flexible instructional groups and target
instruction to meet student needs. The data will help them determine the success of their instructional
program and make adjustments to meet the needs of their students.
Teacher Teams. Teachers will support each other through these teams as they work together to strengthen
their instructional practice and improve the quality of student learning time. They will support each other in
the implementation of school-wide initiatives.
Rigor and Skills. Instruction at the Holland School will foster the creation of high expectations for its
students. Lessons will encourage students to demonstrate their knowledge of the skills they learn through
intellectual rigor. However, lessons will also be differentiated to provide support for those students who lack
necessary skills to access the grade level curriculum.
Administrative Support. School administration will be available to collaborate with teachers to ensure that
their success in implementing school initiatives. Administrators will also perform classroom walkthroughs
and consistent teacher observations/evaluations to ensure that school-supported programs are being used
in all classrooms.
III.B.10.a-b) Student Assessments
Boston Public Schools currently supports a district-wide formative assessment system. BPS has contracted with
Wireless Generation for grades K-2 and Pearson for grades 3-8. For school year 2010-2011, schools will participate
in four assessment administrations.
Two predictive assessments, both in English language arts and mathematics, will be given to all students in grades
3-8 to determine if students are on track to meet proficiency on the MCAS. These assessments are vertically aligned
and provide scaled scores to measure student growth. All students will also take a mid year and end of year
assessment in English language arts and mathematics, with a possibility of science and history being included in the
upcoming year. These benchmark assessments are designed to mirror the scope and sequence of BPS curricula. In
2010-2011, schools will have the option of administering the assessments to students online or with paper/pencil.
Assessment results will be available via a web-based portal two weeks after the test. For the predictive
assessments, percent correct, scaled scores and standardized scores are available. Standardized scores divide
students into categories based on the mean performance for the district. This report helps schools identify students
in the lowest performance categories in order to provide intervention. Scaled scores are vertically aligned across all
the predictive assessments so a comparison between a student‘s first predictive test score and second test score can
show how much growth the student has attained.
Standard online reports enable teachers and schools to identify students by performance category or to see an entire
grade, classroom, or school. They will use these reports to inform instructional improvements and interventions for
students who need additional resources. Individual student reports show each test the student has taken and their
individual results compared to school and district results.
Teachers can also use the system to pull items from a large item bank and create their own classroom assessments
or quizzes. Items in the bank are aligned to Massachusetts standards. Teachers can also create their own items
and item banks. Additionally, teachers and administrators can assign students to intervention groups in order to track
their progress together or gauge whether or not a particular intervention strategy is successful.
In order to support schools, there will be a district-wide training provided in October. Schools will be required to send
two people to this ―train-the-trainer‖ overview of the platform and assessment results. For continued support, schools
will be invited to web-based sessions after additional assessments to ensure that the student data is being used to
monitor growth and performance. Schools are also invited to attend a training that covers how to administer the
online assessments in early September if they are interested in having students take the assessments online instead
of a paper/pencil format.
The District contracted with Wireless Generation to deliver the DIBELS assessment using the mCLASS system.
Using handheld devices, teachers are able to rapidly and easily identify students who may need early literacy
interventions. Three times per year, complete DIBELS benchmark assessments are administered. Teachers will
also use the system for continuous literacy assessment between the three benchmark assessments. This
information is immediately available on mCLASS, which uses the data to provide individualized recommendations for
reading activities and instruction for each student. The handheld devices are complemented by an online system
that provides tools for planning and progress monitoring. Using the shared online information, teachers, literacy
teams, and school leadership can collaborate to design and monitor effective literacy interventions across the lower
School Specific Process
Holland implements a systematic assessment protocol in addition to complying with BPS-mandated assessments.
Literacy and math coaches support teachers in the process of analyzing student assessment data to determine their
academic needs so that teachers can target instruction to specific needs and skill levels. At the beginning of the
school year, teachers use benchmark assessment data from the previous school year to differentiate instruction. By
October, teachers have determined their instructional groups and are using data to target instruction for students
based on their academic needs. The school uses a combination of formative and summative assessments to
determine student progress and achievement.
Learnia. This standardized test is administered in the fall, winter, and spring to third, fourth, and fifth grade
students. It measures achievement ELA and math. The teachers receive the results almost immediately.
Student performance on these assessments assists the teachers in identifying and targeting student skill
End-of-Unit Math Assessments. These tests are provided by the Investigations curriculum and given
every 4-6 weeks.
End-of-Unit ELA Assessment. These are included in the ELA curriculum.
Writing Prompts. These assessments are performed 3 times a year. Students in grades 1-5 respond to a
writing prompt which is then scored using a rubric to be created by the new multi-grade level Writing Team.
MEPA. This assessment measures the English reading and writing proficiency of ELLs. ELL teachers use
this data to support students in English language acquisition.
MELA-O. This assessment measures the English language oral fluency of ELLs. ELL teachers use this data
to support students in English language acquisition.
DIBELS. These progress monitoring tests assess reading comprehension, phonemic awareness, phonics,
and oral reading fluency in kindergarten, first, and second grade students. The indicators measured by
these assessments are important diagnostics that help teachers determine student progress in specific early
literacy skills such as letter name fluency, nonsense word fluency, phoneme segmentation fluency, and oral
reading fluency. The Mclass website was was used to generate literacy data.
Math Performance Assessments. These activities and are included in the Investigations curriculum and/or
are provided by the BPS Math Department and include summative assessments at the end of each unit and
periodic formative assessment to check student understand of key concepts.
APPENDIX 1 : SAMPLE NOTES FROM LOCAL STAKEHOLDER’S GROUP MEETING
5/10 meeting - FAMILY & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Engaging families as partners in student learning & school improvement
Guiding Questions for Key Lever:
Use the following guiding questions to inform your creation of recommendations
What does data tell us about parents‘ perceptions about barriers to their engagement at school?
What are current school practices to engage families in their students‘ learning?
How could the school become a more welcoming and responsive to families?
How could the school engage families as partners in students‘ learning?
(Please check one)
Recommendation Existing School Central
School Grant Funds
Begin each recommendation with ACTION VERBS such as
establish, develop, create, align, reorganize, implement,
Establish the requirement that all parents are to attend at
least two parent/teacher meetings over the course of the
school year to discuss their student‘s progress in academic
and social/emotional development. To accommodate parents‘
schedule hours will be made available both after school and
Continue implementation of family/community outreach,
including: Family Math Night, Family Literacy Night, Family
Game Night, Martin Luther King Oratorical competition, Real √
Men Read, Mothers/Fathers Day breakfasts, Celebrating
Hispanic Writers Week, and the annual Unity Dinner.
Establish a stipend position for a dedicated parent liaison.
This person will serve as a contact and resource for parents,
help coordinate Parent Council meetings, and assist in the
creation and running of family engagement activities.
Build a business partnership with Boston PIC to bring
private industry insight and experience into the school. These
volunteers in the classroom will help reinforce the importance
of academics outside of school and how it impacts the future.
Establish a partnership with Jump Start to build relationships
with community members in local business and in secondary
APPENDIX 2: LOCAL STAKEHOLDER GROUP COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Role: Name: Selected by:
DESE Designee Joan Brinkerhoff Commissioner
School Committee Designee Marchelle Raynor School committee
School Administrator Jeichael Henderson Superintenent‘s Choice
Teacher Pamela Brodie BTU
Teacher Orlando Jose Malave-Vidal School Faculty Choice
Parent (SPC) Maureen Rodriguez Principal/Superintendent Choice
Community Member Winston Richie Mayor‘s Chocie
EEC(elementary) representative Jason Sachs Secretary Reville‘s Choice
APPENDIX 4: SAMPLE REDESIGN TEAM MEETING AGENDA
Local Stakeholder Group Agenda
1. A review of the framework guiding the school‘s turnaround plans and the objectives for the day‘s meeting
2. A short presentation about the focus of the meeting (10 min.)
3. Breakout groups in which small teams tackled targeted questions and generated possible redesign
strategies related to the meeting‘s focus area
4. Whole-group discussion and prioritization of the ideas discussed by small teams in the breakout groups
(remaining 90-120 min.)
APPENDIX 4: REDESIGN TEAM MEETING FOCUS AREAS
Meeting Focus Area
1 Kickoff Meeting – introduce redesign planning process; initial analysis of stakeholder‘s
2 Accelerating Academic Achievement – analyze student and school data to identify focus areas
3 Accelerating Academic Achievement – based on the previously established focus areas, identify
priorities for instruction, teacher collaboration and professional development
4 Differentiating Instruction and Tiered Supports – identify strategies to continuously assess and
5 Recruit and support strong, effective teachers – identify additional strategies to retract and support
teachers, including through refinement of individualized professional development plans
6 Student and Family Supports – Engage the family and community in turnaround goals; identify
strategies to address students' social, emotional, and health needs and priorities for family-school
7 Culture of High Expectations and Shared Ownership for Results - define methods to strengthen social
and emotional supports
8 Analysis, conclusions and recommendations
9 Analysis, conclusions and recommendations
APPENDIX 5: LOCAL STAKEHOLDER GROUP GOALS, OUTCOMES, ETC
APPENDIX 6: PARENT ADVISORY COUNCIL DESCRIPTION
The parent advisory council (PAC) shall be comprised of parents or legal guardians of students who are enrolled in
LEP programs within the school. Each PAC shall have at least one representative from every language group in
which a program is conducted in a given school. Membership shall be restricted to parents or legal guardians of
students enrolled in LEP programs within the school. The duties of the PAC shall include, but not be limited to,
advising the school on matters that pertain to the education of students in LEP programs, meeting regularly with
school officials to participate in the planning and development of a plan to improve educational opportunities for LEP
students, and to participate in the review of school improvement plans established under section 59C of chapter 71
as they pertain to LEP students. Any PAC may, at its request, meet at least once annually with the school council.
The PAC shall establish bylaws regarding officers and operational procedures. In the course of its duties under this
section, the PAC shall receive assistance from the director of LEP programs for the district or other appropriate
school personnel as designated by the superintendent
APPENDIX 7: CITY CONNECT STUDENT SUPPORT
Students’ social, emotional, and health needs: The school must create a safe environment, make effective use of
a system for addressing the social, emotional, and health needs of its students, and provide appropriate social-
emotional and community-oriented services and supports for students. Describe how the school will:
a. Take steps to address social service and health needs of students and their families, to help students arrive
and remain at school ready to learn. This may include mental health and substance abuse screening.
The Boston Public Schools will address the social, emotional, and health needs of students by adopting the City
Connects (formerly Boston Connects) school-based model of optimized student support. City Connects (CCNX) is
an evidence-based systemic approach to comprehensive and coordinated student support. Designed to promote
strengths in academic, social-emotional, families and physical well-being and alleviate barriers to learning in
elementary school students, the City Connects mission is to have all children engage and learn in school by
connecting each child with a tailored set of prevention, intervention, and enrichment services s/he needs to thrive. In
addition, the CCNX model of student support is aligned with the teaching and learning agenda of the school.
At the core of the intervention is a full-time School Site Coordinator (SSC) in each school (a masters-level school
counselor or school social worker) who serves as a hub for connecting students to a customized set of services.
These services are identified through an environmental scan to determine the community-based resources that are
available to the students in their neighborhood and in the neighborhood of the school. The SSC collaborates with
families, with school faculty and staff, and with the Boston College leadership and research staff in this work. The
SSC works with each classroom teacher and others to systematically assess each and every student and develop a
customized plan for support.
In order to assess the fidelity of implementation and ensure that CCNX achieves the intended results, CCNX has
established a robust evaluation system. The evaluation of the program is performed by CCNX utilizing both
quantitative and qualitative data gathered throughout the course of the implementation. The tools and methods by
which CCNX will monitor the implementation on our behalf are as follows:
Regularly reviewing data submitted by the SSC into the CCNX Student Support Information
Administering satisfaction surveys to teachers, principals and partners
Analyzing student report card data and MCAS scores
SSIS CCNX utilizing a web-based application where the SSC enters data related to the intervention. The data are
collated, analyzed and reported back to each school.
Surveys At the end of each school year, our school community members (principal, teachers and community
partners) will receive surveys to assess their satisfaction with the CCNX intervention. CCNX will provide the school
with a summary report of the findings and use this information to improve the program.
Report Card Data and MCAS Scores One of the intended outcomes of the CCNX intervention is improvement in
report grades and MCAS scores. The school will receive reports from detailing student outcomes based on report
card and MCAS scores.
Independent Evaluation A team of independent external evaluators review the CCNX evaluation design method
and outcomes on an annual basis.